ahri

I never thought it could be NF, if that answer helps :)

Does any of admins have info (and willing to share it) how many people use "new" software aka Flash based one, compared to "oldschool" one. Info about how many accounts which were created before Flash era "transfered" would be awesome too. Thanks in advance :).

I agree with pooltuna. Telling partner what happened obviously gives a hint. p.s. This (obviously) happened to me. I asked TD after the board and he said I should have said to my partner that his spades are high.

Say you are playing a tournament for money. In free tournaments you probably wouldn't care. You defend 3NT and your partner leads a spade, declarer winning the trick. You win the second trick, play another spade, declarer wins again but now you have established spades for your partner. Two tricks later, your partner disconnects. TD replaces your partner and new partner hops on. You are now aware your new partner has no slightest idea about play of the hand. He sees bunch of low spades in his hand. You are well aware 3NT goes down if he keeps them, and it makes if he doesn't. It's obvious this makes quite a difference on your tournament placement. Do you think it's ethical to tell your partner that his spades are high? Do you think it's ethical to review the play to your (new) partner? If yes, to how many details [does it include partnership agreements...]? Any other solution you could suggest?

What part of original question do you consider bad wording? I think the part people take issue with is "making him aware it's important part of the board". How does tanking send that specific message? The tank could just as easily be because partner has a problem of his own. How can you know that he's tanking for your benefit? It does not send that specific message, of course. But it for sure provides more time for partner to think. When your partner pauses for a minute or two, do you think he is doing that because he wants to tease his opponents, or that at this particular part of the board the decision has to be made? I think it's VERY obvious to everyone that when someone pauses for a long thought, it's most probably very important situation on the board. And the defender in question had no problem on the board, he was doing it to make his partner pay attention that the crucial trick is now.

I wouldn't say so as it's somewhat usual (and advisable) to tank before following to the first trick.

What part of original question do you consider bad wording?

I encountered it and didn't know how to react.

Imagine situation like this. You play the defence, and you just won a trick. To you, it's obvious you need to cashout. Your partner could have problems seeing it or he might not be at your level of play. Is it ethical to think-tank for a bit thus giving him a chance to evaluate the board (and making him aware it's important part of the board)? Did you ever do it or encounter this?

I'd humbly say it's 6KC Blackwood here in my partnerships. You need both kings to make grand anyway.

4♠ here too.

I'd open it too, but that does not say much, I am a junior. RvW I'd consider status of the match, position and opponents :).

well, i don't think there is 100% line, i am just interested how people would tackle this one :D.

After some nice auction... 1♠ - 1NT 2♣*- 3♣** 5♣ (2♣=nat or various 16+ hands, 3♣=5-7 with 5+ clubs) .. it's your job to safely land this contract: ♠ xx ♥ Jxx ♦ xxx ♣ KQ8xx ♠ AQxxx ♥ AQxx ♦ - ♣ A9xx Defenders are experts and west, after some thought, leads J♣. What's your plan? :)

In the original board outstanding trumps were 8 and 7 (i just wrote AK3 AKQ to make it easier to see). Declarer thought he pulled all trumps for sure (he was asked that in the moment of claiming and he admitted that he thought he pulled all the trumps).

2♠ quite easily

At actual board it were 7 and 8 and it was not AKQ & AKQ but I simplified it :)

Contract is played in spades and 6 tricks before end declarer has: ♠AK3 ♥AKQ A defender has ♠765 ♦AKQ Declarer plays AK♠ and claims all the tricks. On the question if he was aware that there is trump outside still, he answers honestly that he did not. It's quite obvious he can play hearts first to give only one trick, but how would you judge this one because of his careless play and claim?

Wouldn't it be normal if you choose "Kibitz only North" that you see South's hand when North is dummy? :rolleyes:

At my table the bidding went: 1C Dbl 1S 2D 2S pass pass 3C pass 3D 3S Dbl pas pass pass

i am not quite sure why this is relevant. Poster to which I replied asked about opponents' system, that's why.

Notice this thread is in "sayc & 2/1" forum.

Yes, there is no reason to play 4D as nonforcing - responder can always pass 3S with very minimal hand. IMO it should be spade fit and something like AK, AQ in diamonds, showing max.

I am not sure if I have last version, but in mine Gazzilli is written twice under conventions part. Was just wanting to report that.

Read the topic name. It's 2/1, not SAYC. They are in GF already. p.s. I don't like 3D at all, but it's understandable.